This is the situation, we all know what clans are and know what benefits they have. What I find to be the problem is the following:

Currently we have 454 clans, of which only 33 (or 36) are really active. This means that we pretty much have more than 400 clans which do absolutely nothing.

The problem in this is the following: new player retention.

A new player joins CB, joins a clan only to find out it has possibly 10 characters in it which are not doing anything. Upon close observation, all the accounts are dead and hadn't been played since 2008 or worse, since 2005!

New player leaves, there goes retention and competitiveness.

Then there is the fear of clan rewards dropping. At this moment 36 clans are being given a bonus. When removing those dead clans, the bonus is not affected at all, instead it would only be beneficial because you gain more points from active clans than from dead clans.

See below some statistics from Clan standings: 1 week:

033 clans which have a clan score of 1000 or more
003 clans which have a clan score in between 100 and 1000

089 clans which have a clan score in between 10 and 100
129 clans which have a clan score in between 0 and 10
020 clans which have a score of exactly 0
113 clans which have a score of in between -10 and 0

051 clans which have a score of in between -100 and -10
016 clans which have a score lower than -100 but not yet enough to disband

"On the other hand, in case you would be right, then removing those dead clans would not have any negative effect either at all."

Not necessarily, what WoC is saying is that it is difficult to find clan opponents down low. Which is true. A lot of these dead clans have members that have lower characters, that while they do not fight themselves, they do give lower NUBs an opponent to fight.

"Not necessarily, what WoC is saying is that it is difficult to find clan opponents down low. Which is true. A lot of these dead clans have members that have lower characters, that while they do not fight themselves, they do give lower NUBs an opponent to fight."

and having these lower opponents allow for low newbies to rack up CPs for their clan

All of the dead clans should most definitely not be disbanded. If that happened there would be less than 10 clans getting a clan bonus at all. You would be looking at a bonus with 3% drop as you go down just 1 rank.

One day a clan may be positive, and one day a clan may be negative. It depends if one of the clan's members successfully defends against an attacker. Why don't we just leave them all there? I'd think that a new player would automatically want to join a clan with a high score, so these low scoring clans wouldn't do much harm.

It depends if one of the clan's members successfully defends against an attacker.

so these low scoring clans wouldn't do much harm.

True, the entire point is: those members are not attacked, so they don't defend. My entire point is to remove confusion for new members. If they join an active clan, more chance of them staying. It's worth a try when it does not do anything wrong.

I think it would be fine to remove them from the dropdown list for joining. But don't remove them from the game. They make good targets for when you start a new ncb. Also if they are removed then the clan bonus is always going to look like it does about 2 hours after it starts again on monday morning. Meaning that the top clan gets 15% and the next one only gets 11% then 7% and 4% and 1% and the rest get none.

Since it will be so hard to get into the clan bonus levels itself you will see more people give up on trying to be in a clan and we will end up with less and less clans. Less and less clans mean that less are getting a bonus itself.

"isn't the bonus for all calculated based on the total number of clans?"

It must be as we were just number 6 and only had 11.1% bonus, it's usually much higher than this. As you can see, there are only 2 pages of clans right now, and it doesn't matter that the majority of the one's that are gone right now were negative, it still hurt my reward. On that note I would like to change my opinion. Don't delete those clans.

I've never understood why Clans get disbanded at some arbitrary figure.
To my mind, if a Clan attacks, that's enough to call it a clan (although in some cases a rubbish one :-) ). If no member of the clan has attacked in a week - disband it.
Would certainly have saved me $CB, and a lot of head-scratching for names :-D

Then less characters in clans must have been attacked. I have not changed anything.

This thread is closed to new posts.
However, you are welcome to reference it
from a new thread; link this with the html
<a href="/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=002nQa">Dead clans, remove them or not?</a>